Vengeful Parry trick?

[KarinsDad]

specifically - "to a square adjacent to you"

If a power notes the destination for your or an ally’s move (for example, “a space adjacent to the target”), the character allowed to move decides either to move to that destination or not. You can’t move partway. Similarly, if a power specifies where you force an enemy to move, you decide either to move the enemy there or not.

The decision clause here overrides the destination clause. You have yet to provide a rules quote that supercedes this rule.

Specific vs. general has nothing to do with this because the power repeats the example in the general rule. There is no specific explicit rule in that power that overrides the quoted rule here.

 

[Samir]

specifically - "to a square adjacent to you"

In this case, the power lets you slide the target 2 squares. Applying the general rule to this power leads us to ... you made slide the target 0, 1, 2 squares. But the power requires that at the end of the move the target end "adjacent to you" (specific).

The general rule Draco quoted actually does not say that at all.

If a power notes the destination for your or an ally’s move (for example, “a space adjacent to the target”), the character allowed to move decides either to move to that destination or not. You can’t move partway. Similarly, if a power specifies where you force an enemy to move, you decide either to move the enemy there or not.

It says you can choose to either 1) slide the target to the destination, or 2) not slide it at all.

So there's no general vs. specific here, because the rule very specifically says what you do for this type of effect.

 

[DarkLord Of DForce]

Okay, I got a reply from CS in response to me asking them about VP again, and quoting the Movement text from page 219, PH2:

Response (Support Agent) - 01/11/2010 07:08 AM
Hello Ronald,

"Yes you must move the monster. A move of 0 squares is still a move.
Perfectly legal there. Sorry if I wasn't too clear there.
Please let me know if you need anymore help!"

So I read this as in you can shift yourself, and slide the target -0- squares for the move. So Overwhelming Strike and other powers are the same, and still safe...

From now on, I think I'm gonna wait until I get at least 5 replies from CS on any question, then average the results before I post them here.

 

[Journeymanmage]

...
Using that logic, you cannot apply damage bonuses to powers, because the power's 'Specific' (no damage bonus is shown in the power) beats the damage bonus's 'General'... that makes no sense.

The lack of a rule or comment is now a specific?

In the OP, Vengeful Parry has a specific requirement that overrides the general rule.
- General rule: Slide 2 (move 0, 1, 2) (applies unless specific overrides)
- Specific override: Must end adjacent (explicitly stated requirement)

If I understand your comment above, then a power such as Twin Strike only does 1[W] damage. Period.

Nowhere in Twin Strike does it say, "don't add additional modifiers".
Damage for Twin Strike is: 1[W] + additional modifiers ...
Because:

General rule:
- Roll the damage indicated in the powers description.
- Add the ability modifier specified in the powers description.
- Additional bonuses: racial/feat bonus, enhancement bonus (weapon or an implement), item/power/unspecified bonus.

Twin Strike:
- Damage indicated: 1[W]
- Add ability modifier specified in the powers description. (no modifier listed)
- Additional bonuses

Could you point out where in the Twin Strike power the rule is stated explicitly to only use [W] and Not to add "additional bonuses? The General rule takes into account "additional bonus(es)" and does not require a specific statement in the power to add them. It would take a specific statement not to add them.

I'm not seeing the "'Specific' (no damage bonus is shown in the power)" in writing:

you cannot apply damage bonuses to powers, because the power's 'Specific' (no damage bonus is shown in the power) beats the damage bonus's 'General'.

General: - Additional bonuses: racial/feat bonus, enhancement bonus (weapon or an implement), item/power/unspecified bonus

As to Vengeful Parry:
General: Slide 0, 1, 2
Specific: End Adjacent

 

[KarinsDad]

In the OP, Vengeful Parry has a specific requirement that overrides the general rule.
- General rule: Slide 2 (move 0, 1, 2) (applies unless specific overrides)
- Specific override: Must end adjacent (explicitly stated requirement)

This might be true if there were not a general PHB II rule that also states that the destination of "must end adjacent" can be overruled by the user of the power (and has been quoted here several times). How do you explain the PHB II rule that flat out disagrees with your POV?

 

[RigaMortus2]

As to Vengeful Parry:
General: Slide 0, 1, 2
Specific: End Adjacent

I see it more like

You can choose to force move the target, or not.
If Yes, slide target [up to] 2 squares, and they must end up adjacent to you.
If No, then you just don't slide them.

The "end adjacent" clause is specific ONLY if you choose to slide the target.

This is the only way to rule it where all core rules (PHBI and PHBII) make sense and don't contradict each other.

 

[Samir]

I see it more like

You can choose to force move the target, or not.
If Yes, slide target [up to] 2 squares, and they must end up adjacent to you.
If No, then you just don't slide them.

The "end adjacent" clause is specific ONLY if you choose to slide the target.

This is the only way to rule it where all core rules (PHBI and PHBII) make sense and don't contradict each other.

This is correct.

As to Vengeful Parry:
General: Slide 0, 1, 2
Specific: End Adjacent

End adjacent is general, not specific. Refer to posts 31 and 32.

 

[Journeymanmage]

I stand corrected. When I looked over the phb II, pg 219 I skipped over the colored box at the bottom of the 1st column. That box does explicitly state you can skip moving a target. That would leave it at >if< you move the target it would need to end adjacent but you are not required to move them.

 

[DracoSuave]

I stand corrected. When I looked over the phb II, pg 219 I skipped over the colored box at the bottom of the 1st column. That box does explicitly state you can skip moving a target. That would leave it at >if< you move the target it would need to end adjacent but you are not required to move them.

This I do agree with... if you move the target at all, it's adjacent or nothing. And if you are more than 3 squares away, you cannot satisfy the destination, so it's 'nothing.'

The same applies to Overwhelming Strike and powers like that (which works -exactly- the same way.)

If you're using a reach weapon at reach, you can shift one square, but you -cannot- slide the opponent into the destination because it's more than the one square indicated.

 

[Destil]

Compare to Come and Get It:

Come and Get It - You pull each target 2 squares to a space adjacent to you. You cannot pull a target that cannot end adjacent to you.
Vengeful Parry - You shift 1 square and then slide the target 2 squares to a square adjacent to you.

My guess is that these two should have much closer wording. But this is just a guess to the rules as intended. As written, yes, I think you could use parry to dodge an attack.

Ideally the rules would do something define allow two options: May (slide/push/pull/shift) is implied and means you can choose to do X or fewer squares unless Must is used, in which case you can not use the power/feat/whatever if you can't.